On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
> Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
> > On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
> >> Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof:
> >>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Lars Ellenberg
> >>> <[email protected]>   wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 06:18:07PM +0100, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
> >>>>> I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yep, "degraded" is not a state available for pacemaker.
> >>>> Pacemaker cannot do much about "suboptimal".
> >>>
> >>> I wonder what it would take to change that.  I suspect either a
> >>> crystal ball or way too much knowledge of drbd internals.
> >>
> >> The RA would be responsible to check this. For drbd any diskstate
> >> different from UpToDate/UpToDate is suboptimal.
> >
> > Have you actually looked at the resource agent? It does already evaluate
> > the disk state and adjusts the master preference accordingly. What else
> > is there to do?
> 
> Maybe I misunderstood Andrew's comment. I read it this way:  If we 
> introduce a new state "suboptimal", would it be hard to detect it?
> 
> I just wanted to express that detecting suboptimality seems not to be 
> that hard.

But that state is useless for pacemaker,
since it cannot do anything about it.

I thought I made that clear.

-- 
: Lars Ellenberg
: LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability
: DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Reply via email to